alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Wright Brothers Day, 2023

One hundred twenty years ago on the sand dunes of Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, two brothers forever changed the course of history. Wilbur and Orville Wright achieved one of the most transformative technological advancements in the history of humankind: the first-ever sustained, controlled, and powered flight. This Wright Brothers Day, we honor Wilbur and Orville's quintessentially American spirit of innovation and ingenuity, and we celebrate their enduring legacy as pioneers who took our Nation to new heights.

On December 17, 1903, after years of arduous research, meticulous designs, and dangerous trials, Wilbur and Orville launched the Wright Flyer. Twelve seconds and 120 feet later, the brothers had achieved controlled flight. Their feat propelled our Nation forward, accelerating advancements in aeronautics and bringing us closer to unlocking the full potential of humanity. Through their determination and bold vision, the Wright Brothers laid the foundations for some of the greatest technological developments on record—from breaking the sound barrier and stepping foot on the moon to flying a helicopter on Mars and launching deep-space telescopes that are answering some of the fundamental questions of the universe. The legacy of the Wright brothers lives on through the talents and spirits of today's American dreamers and doers.

Most of all, Wilbur and Orville's advancement led to a new American innovation: modern air travel. My Administration is committed to preserving and investing in this legacy by enhancing safety and comfort from takeoff to landing. Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we are improving airport infrastructure across the country—expanding capacity at airport terminals, increasing energy efficiency, and making air travel more accessible for people with disabilities—all while creating good jobs across our Nation.

I have often said that America can be defined in one word: possibilities. This Wright Brothers Day, let us recognize these two courageous brothers from Dayton, Ohio, for reminding us what we can accomplish when we work together to reach our loftiest dreams and tackle our greatest challenges. May we recommit to carrying forward their bold spirit of creativity and cooperation as we forge a better future for all.

The Congress, by a joint resolution approved December 17, 1963, as amended (77 Stat. 402; 36 U.S.C. 143), has designated December 17 of each year as “Wright Brothers Day” and has authorized and requested the President to issue annually a proclamation inviting the people of the United States to observe that day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim December 17, 2023, as Wright Brothers Day.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifteenth day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.

[FR Doc. 2023-28169

Billing code 3395-F4-P
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 114 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5330]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

         REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

  Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to 
the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as 
follows:

       Mr. LUNGREN, DANIEL E. of California: Committee on House 
     Administration. H.R. 406. A bill to amend the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 to permit candidates for 
     election for Federal office to designate an individual who 
     will be authorized to disburse funds of the authorized 
     campaign committees of the candidate in the event of the 
     death of the candidate (Rept. 112-628). Referred to the 
     Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
       Mr. DREIER: Committee on Rules. H.R. 6169. A bill to 
     provide for expedited consideration of a bill providing for 
     comprehensive tax reform (Rept. 112-629). Referred to the 
     House Calendar.
       Mr. ISSA: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 
     H.R. 4365. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to 
     make clear that accounts in the Thrift Savings Fund are 
     subject to certain Federal tax levies; with an amendment 
     (Rept. 112-630). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House 
     on the state of the Union.

                          ____________________
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,022,024
<SECURITIES>                                 1,224,845
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,395,157
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  5,610,129
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,455,970
<PP&E>                                       1,491,396
<DEPRECIATION>                               (777,940)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,939,531
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          760,379
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,640,274
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,538,878
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,939,531
<SALES>                                      8,062,369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,062,369
<CGS>                                        7,775,892
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,775,892
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,649,831
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             131,768
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,140,637)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,140,637)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,140,637)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.31)
        

</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 21

- 00323

- CR

Rosa Anita MORENO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 15

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 642167

Honorable Melissa Vara , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE WATKINS

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED

.

SIGNED June 29, 2022.

_____________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Exhibit 23.2

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report on Form
10-KSB of our report of Milestone Scientific, Inc., dated April 6, 2002, except
for Notes B, H, I and K which are as of April 15, 2002 on our audit of the
consolidated financial statements of Milestone Scientific, Inc. as of December
31, 2001 and for the year then ended, incorporated by reference in the
registration statement on Form S-3 (SEC File No. 333-39784) of Milestone
Scientific, Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to
the Securities Act of 1933.


                                                               J.H. Cohn LLP

Roseland, New Jersey
April 15, 2002
# C_2021217EN.01001401.xml

| 7.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu — Poland) — Grupa Warzywna sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

(Case C-935/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 273 - Overstatement in the tax return of the amount of the refund of VAT - Error of assessment by the taxable person concerning the taxable nature of a transaction - Correction of the tax return following an audit - Penalty of an amount equal to 20 % of the overstated VAT reimbursement - Principle of proportionality)

(2021/C 217/19)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Grupa Warzywna sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

Operative part of the judgment

Article 273 of the Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, and the principle of proportionality must be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a national law which imposes on a taxable person, who wrongly classified a transaction that is exempt from VAT as a transaction which is subject to that tax, an additional tax liability equal to 20 % of the amount of the overstated VAT reimbursement that was wrongly claimed, where that sanction applies without distinction to a situation where the irregularity is the result of an error of assessment made by the parties to the transaction regarding the taxable nature of that transaction, which is characterised by the lack of evidence of evasion and of losses of revenues for the State Treasury, and to a situation where such specific circumstances do not exist.

---

(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.

---
#### The State, ex rel. Sparto et al., Appellants, *v.*Juvenile Court of Darke County et al., Appellees.

(No. 31898

Decided February 15, 1950.)

*65
      *Messrs. Ginocchio & Ginocchio,*for appellants.

*Mr. Cecil E. Edwards*and *Mr. Paul W. Younker,*for appellees.

By the Court.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

A writ of prohibition will not be granted to prevent proceedings in a lower court concerning matters as to which such court has power to determine its own jurisdiction. *Wisner*v. *Probate Court of Columbiana County,*145 Ohio St., 419, 61 N. E. (2d), 889; *State, ex rel. Levy,*v. *Savord,*143 Ohio St., 451, 55 N. E. (2d), 735; 32 Ohio Jurisprudence, 581, Section 20.

The writ will not issue to prevent an erroneous judgment, or to serve the purpose of appeal, or to correct mistakes of the lower court in deciding questions with-. in its jurisdiction. *State, ex rel. Norris,*v. *Hodapp, Judge,*135 Ohio St., 26, 18 N. E. (2d), 984; 32 Ohio Jurisprudence, 572, Section 9; *State, ex rel. Garrison,*v. *Brough,*94 Ohio St., 115, 113 N. E., 683; 32 Ohio Jurisprudence, 586, Section 24. See, also, *State, ex rel. Niederlehner,*v. *Mack, Judge,*125 Ohio St., 559, 182 N. E., 498.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman,. Stewart, Turner and Tart, JJ., concur.
This is to signify that

HARDWOOD PLYWOOD & VENEER ASSOCIATION 

1825 MICHAEL FARADAY DRIVE 

RESTON, VIRGINIA 20190 

Inspection Agency AA-716 

Type A (Third-Party) Inspection Body 

has met the requirements of the IAS Accreditation Criteria for Inspection Agencies (AC98), has demonstrated 

ISO/IEC Standard 17020, General criteria for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection, accredited, commencing October 15, 2010, to provide inspection services in the approved scope of accreditatio Patrick V. McCullen C. P. Ramani, P.E Vice President President 

(see attached scope of accreditation for field(s) of inspection, including type, range, methods or procedures)

Print Date: 11/15/2010 
Hardwood Plywood & Veneer Association AA-716 

Type A (Third-Party) Inspection Body 

 October 15, 2010 

Commencement Date C. P. Ramani, P.E. 

President 

Print Date: 11/15/2010 

Hardwood Plywood & Veneer Association 1825 Michael Faraday Dr. Director of Testing, CertifiReston, VA 20190 

FIELDS OF 

INSPECTIONS 

TYPE AND RANGE OF 

INSPECTIONS 

INSPECTION METH

AND PROCEDUR

Hardwood Plywood - Formaldehyde Emissions per CARB ATCM 

In-plant Inspection and Certification Pro

HPVA Formaldehyde CertificatiQuality Assurance Manual (QM
Denied and Opinion Filed August 16, 2018 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00930-CV 

IN RE JOSEPH STROFFOLINO, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the 219th Judicial District Court 

Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 219-00125-2018 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Bridges, Brown, and Boatright 

Opinion by Justice Bridges 

Before the Court is relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he complains of 

the trial court’s March 23, 2018 capias and bench warrant. In that order, the trial court found 

relator in contempt for failing to comply with prior discovery orders and failing to appear at the 

March 23, 2018 show cause hearing and directed the Collin County Sheriff to take relator into 

custody until relator complies with the trial court’s orders. Relator states that he was arrested 

pursuant to the bench warrant on August 13, 2018. In this original proceeding, relator seeks a writ 

of habeas corpus directing relator’s release from custody and dissolving the bench warrant. 

A contempt judgment may be collaterally attacked in an original habeas corpus proceeding. 

Ex parte Rohleder, 424 S.W.2d 891, 892 (Tex. 1967). The purpose of a writ of habeas corpus is 

not to determine the guilt of the contemnor, but only to determine whether he was afforded due 

process of law or if the order of contempt was void. Ex parte Gordon, 584 S.W.2d 686, 688 (Tex. 

1979). A court will issue a writ of habeas corpus if the order underlying the contempt is void, or 
 –2– 

if the contempt order itself is void. Id. An order is void if it is beyond the power of the court to 

enter it, or if it deprives the relator of liberty without due process of law. In re Stein, 331 S.W.3d 

538, 540 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Shaffer, 649 S.W.2d 

300, 302 (Tex.1983) and Ex parte Barlow, 899 S.W.2d 791, 794 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 

1995, orig. proceeding)). A judgment of contempt imposing a coercive restraint is void if the 

conditions for purging the contempt are impossible to perform. Ex parte Jones, 602 S.W.2d 400, 

402 (Tex. Civ. App.—Waco 1980, orig. proceeding). But the burden is on the relator to establish 

in the trial court that he cannot perform the act necessary to purge himself. Id. 

To obtain habeas relief, the relator must provide proof that he is currently being restrained. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(D); In re Kuster, 363 S.W.3d 287, 293 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2012, 

orig. proceeding). The record includes no proof that relator was arrested or that relator remains 

confined or restrained. The petition, therefore, does not provide the Court with the proof of current 

restraint required by Rule 52 and should, therefore, be denied. 

Accordingly, we deny relator’s August 15, 2018 “petition for writ of habeas corpus and 

dissolution of warrant” without addressing the merits of the petition. 

180930F.P05 

/David L. Bridges/ 

DAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         3,464,102
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  463,883
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,927,985
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,927,985
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          400,000
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,527,985
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,927,985
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               268,703
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               87,135
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                181,568
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   181,568
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .34
        

</TABLE>
Gary Charles Brestle, Petitioner,
v. Department ofJustice eta!., Respondents. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil ActionNo.

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED JUN 202012 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy courts forthe District of Columbia

This matter, broughtprose, is before the Court on its initial review ofthe petition for a writ ofmandamus and application for leave to proceed informapauperis ("IFP"). Upon review ofthe petition, the Court finds thatpetitionerhas failed to state a claim for such extraordinary relief. It therefore will grant the IFP application and dismiss the petitionpursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal ofa prisoner's complaint upon a determination that the complaint, among other grounds, fails to state a claim upon which reliefcan be granted). Petitioner, a federal prisoner in Jesup, Georgia, seeks an orderto compel the Department ofJustice to investigate his claims of"preindictment" civil rights violations allegedly "committed by agents ofthe Federal Bureau oflnvestigation
... operating under the control and instruction" ofan assistant United States attorney in West Palm Beach, Florida. Pet. at 2. The extraordinary remedy ofa writ ofmandamus is available to compel an "officer or employee ofthe United States or any agency thereofto perform a duty owed to plaintiff." 28 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner bears a heavy burden ofshowing that his right to a writ of mandamus is "clear and indisputable." In re Cheney, 406 F.3d 723, 729 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). "Itis well-settled that a writ ofmandamus is not available to compel 

# 3discretionary acts." Cox v. Sec'y of Labor, 739 F. Supp. 28, 30 (D.D.C. 1990) (citing cases). The United States Attorney General has absolute discretion in deciding whether to investigate petitioner's accusations. As a general rule applicable to the circumstances ofthis case, such decisions are not subjecttojudicial review. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. Reno, 56 F.3d 1476, 1480-81 (D.C. Cir. 1995); see id. at 1480 ("A court may properly issue a writ ofmandamus only ifthe duty to be performed is ministerial and the obligation to act peremptory and clearly defined. The law must not only authorize the demanded action, but require it
....") (citations, internal quotation marks and footnote omitted). A separate Order ofdismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: June

# __J_J:_, 2012 United States District Judge

2
# C_2011211EN.01000302.xml

| 16.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 26 May 2011 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-306/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 93/37/EEC and 2004/18/EC - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Urban development legislation of the Autonomous Community of Valencia)

2011/C 211/05

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Alcover San Pedro, D. Kukovec and M. Konstantinidis, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 1, 6(6), 11, 12 and Title II of Chapter IV (Articles 24 to 29) of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54) and Articles 2, 6, 24, 30, 31(4)(a), 48(2) and 53 of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114) — Urban development legislation of the Valencian Community — Non-conformity with Community law

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Income Partners 1989-B, Ltd's balance sheet and statement of operations con-
tained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         497,687
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  593,383
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,211,499
<PP&E>                                         8,324,548
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,069,106)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,602,323
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          233,712
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     4,299,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4,602,323
<SALES>                                        2,061,614
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,087,152
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,053,855<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                878,068
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            878,068
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   878,068
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation,
depletion and amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and
interest expense.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>